>
> There are a number of important exceptions where
> cardholders can continue to sign:
>
> cardholders who have an old style card that has yet to be upgraded
> cardholders from overseas who have an old style card that
> has yet to be upgraded
> disabled cardholders who have a chip and signature card
>
> Steve
Not strictly true. You DO NOT have to be disabvled to have Chip &
Signature Cards. I

If you feel safer signing than PINning.

You simply can't remember numbers you infrequently use, and refuse to
write them down.

You are numerically dyselexic etc

Then Signature Cards are for you.

Then of course there's the liability question.

Very interesting article just published on Card Cloning by Heise
Security:

http://www.heise-security.co.uk/articles/100187/0

Last 2 paragarphs.

In the UK, the Banking Code (PDF file) section 12.12 states "Unless we
can show that you have acted fraudulently or without reasonable care,
your liability for the misuse of your card will be limited..."
essentially to a maximum of 50 UK pounds. However, the code is
voluntary, and the onus is usually still on the customer to prove the
fraudulent nature of the transaction. The initial position of the UK
banks is generally to insist that customer has exhibited contributory
negligence.

In other jurisdictions, notably Germany, banks have so far covered all
the losses from skimming as a gesture of goodwill provided evidence
could be demonstrated that fraud had indeed occurred. There has
reportedly been no case in which a German bank has left a victim empty-
handed